I have obtained just one job in my career through a recruiter. It worked out well for me. If my experience can help you, great.

This is about what works for me, not the great be-all and end-all of how you can live your life. Especially for this subject: we're talking about making money. I once took a year off work because I didn't think there was a good fit with the companies hiring at the time. I've been told that most people consider this a poor career choice.

I happen to hire through recruiters from time to time, so I can also give you some perspective from the client end.

Update: Just to clarify, these points are about my personal experience working with recruiters on full-time employment.

Double submission

...one staffing company tried to tell me that a second submission would "cancel out" the first and the hiring company would simply reject me as a candidate.

This is 100% true. It's absolutely bad to have two recruiters submit your resume to the same client. Speaking as a client, I round-file any resume received through two recruiters. This is because I do not want to end up fighting with them over who should get paid. And they will fight.

The trouble is, the recruiter thinks that they only have upside to submitting your resume, even if the client already has the resume, or you've worked there in the past, or another recruiter has already submitted it. They will tell you all kinds of stories, such as "if you haven't submitted it in the last ninety days I can resubmit it for you." The recruiter would rather have a slim chance of a fee than no chance, and if your resume gets tossed, well, better luck with the next company.

Never mind what the recruiter wants to do, follow these guidelines:

Always ask for the client name. Recruiters will often stall, claiming the client demands confidentiality. Simply say that you may already have contacts into the company and you wish to save them time and trouble. If they still refuse, ask them what else thay have for you. Never submit your resume blindly. Sadly, some recruiters will screw things up and submit you without permission. It's your loss when this happens. The best you can do is refuse to do any further business with them.

If you have had any contact with that company about getting a job, especially if the company has seen your resume, do not allow the recruiter to submit your resume. Period. You can only lose, you can never gain. For example, I have your resume. Now I see it from a recruiter. I could have hired you without paying a fee. Now your resume has a big fat "+20% in cash" sign on it. It goes to the bottom of the pile. I don't want to argue with the recruiter if there's someone else who is "clean."

Of course, if you're the right person you get the job and I'll tough it out with the recruiter. But it's a lot of bother forwarding emails and stuff to prove I had you before the recruiter sent you in. I'm not going to bother unless you're exceptional. And if you're exceptional, you were already at the top of the pile and you didn't need the recruiter to help you get an interview. Capiche?

The corollary is that you must never go around the recruiter if you first heard of the opportunity through them. If your friend Steve works there and he never mentioned they were hiring, let the recruiter run with the ball and earn their fee. If your friend Steve mentioned that they are always looking for good people but you never gave Steve your resume, let the recruiter run with the ball and earn their fee.

If you gave Steve your resume and for whatever reason you didn't get an interview, but the recruiter tells you they're hiring, politely say that you are already working with the client and ask them what else they have. Then bug Steve to get things rolling.

Pad your resume with every keyword that might possibly fit. I used to put a keywords section at the bottom for their software programs. If you have a tenuous claim to knowing about something, put it down. For example, I claim J2EE and EJB. But quite honestly, my experience with non-EJB J2EE systems is way bigger than my experience with EJB J2EE systems. But EJB is one of my keywords.

They whole exercise is a waste if the client thinks you've lied, so here's what to do:

First, get a written job description from the recruiter. Don't settle for a verbal description. The recruiter can and will email you something, often exactly what the client emailed them. I've seen forwarded emails with sensitive information such as the client's secret budget objectives. Recruiters are in a hurry, and they love the 'forward' button.

Negotiating Your Salary: How to Make $1000 a Minute is the best book I’ve ever read about negotiating compensation, and I read a lot of books. My friend (and great development leader) Ian Ameline recommended it to me when I was looking for a job. I read it cursorily and decided to try not mentioning my salary expectations. I received an offer for $15,000 more than I was willing to accept!

This book does more than just tell you what to do. It tells you how to go about it so that you don’t alienate your future employer. It shows you how to work with them to find the compensation that works for you and for them. Without selling out.

If you honestly can’t afford this book, borrow mine before your next job interview. It’s that important.

Next, screen yourself out. If you have a scant claim to something and the client doesn't mention it, don't worry. But if it seems central to what they do, you'd better be honest: "Yeah, I put Ruby down because I used it on a student project, but I'm thinking that 37Signals might have high expectations... Let's pass on this one..." The recruiter will understand.

Don't play fast and loose, or you'll wind up coding a Monopoly game in a language and architecture you don't understand. Keywords are fine to get the recruiter to call you, but not fine to get you into an interview where you don't have what the client needs.

Disclosing your compensation

Now about disclosure. Google around. You will find that it is always a bad move to discuss your current or past compensation details with an employer. Guess what? That goes 2^n for recruiters. Do not discuss past or present compensation details with a recruiter. Ever.

As a client, I bug the recruiter to get that info so that I am armed with the power to underpay you when we negotiate. The recruiter gets to play the hard ass while I pretend to be Uncle Reg fighting to get you every dollar.

Ok, I'm not really that bad. But you know what? I'm human, I have a budget, and within a certain range of 'reasonable' for what you can do, it's my job to pay you closer to the bottom of the range and let you earn a raise. It's your job to get me to pay the top of the range and earn a raise anyways.

There're books written on the subject of negotiating salary. They all say the same damn thing. If you want the Coles Notes, when the recruiter says "no details, no submit," you say "You win, no submit." If the recruiter wants to take themselves out of the picture, that's their business. Don't believe them when they say the client insists. I prefer to have the details, but if Peter Norvig wants to meet me and won't tell me what Google is paying him, I'm not arguing.

Now I said you don't disclose details. I think you want to mention a range. Here's exactly what I say when people ask me:

Over the past five years, my compensation has ranged from X to Y dollars.

And when they press for more details, I ask them whether this is in the client's budget. If the answer is yes, let's submit the resume. And they will ask for more details. How much is base? How much bonus? How much last year? Does that include stock options? I blow off all additional details. If they can't submit my resume without additional details, that's their problem.

What the client needs is to know that you are neither too cheap (you must suck, or be ignorant, or both), nor too dear (motivated by money, or ignorant, or both). The range answers the question while giving very little away for the negotiation.

Here's how to calculate X and Y. Over the last five years, take the smallest base salary you've earned in any one year or at any one job. Include only the cash portion. This is X.

Now take the most you've earned in any one of the five years. Include the cash equivalent of perquisites like travel to trade shows or conferences, meals, drinks, everything (I drink two free cups of coffee a day. If I'm calculating Y for this year, I'm adding $2.20 a working day to Y).

That's your range. Notice how it works even if you've been at the same job for five years? Nice. And don't discuss this calculation with a recruiter, ever. Their job is to get you an interview. X and Y are all they need to get you the interview.

Speaking as a client, this is enough. I may want more before I make an offer, but this is enough to know whether I'm wasting your time bringing you in for an interview.

Okay, three tips. That's enough for now. Good luck with your search.

p.s. Why is it so much worse to tell a recruiter your compensation details? Because recruiters will tell everyone. If you tell one prospective employer exactly what you made last year, they do not tell every other employer. They probably consider it advantageous to keep that information to themselves. You've damaged your ability to negotiate with them, but if things don't work out, you can start again with a fresh slate at the next interview.

But if you tell a recruiter, they put it on your file and every time they send your resume out they will send that information with it. Really nasty recruiters will use you to sell other candidates (Ok, you like Kate but you want to see a few more people? Well, I can send you Reg, but he's asking 20% more. If I were you, I'd make an offer to Kate before someone else gets her). If the recruiter has no idea about your compensation history, or only has a broad range, the recruiter will probably send your resume in.

But if they know your exact details, the shortest line between this situation and their fee is pushing Kate instead of you. Not only are you screwed with clients that want to make you an offer, you're screwed with clients that haven't even interviewed you yet! Speaking as a client, I might have liked you so much more that I would happily pay more. But it's hard to know that if I haven't met you, and it's hard for me to have the optimism that somehow you're going to be worth the extra 20% when I haven't seen you juggle.

Don't tell recruiters anything more than X and Y. And even then, skip X and Y if you can.

Please continue to post whatever you like in the comments on my blog. I'm not going to debate you here, but I won't delete your posts either.

Please keep a few things in mind. First, I'm almost always the client when working with people like you, so I'm only seeing half of the story, the half where you work very hard to convince me that everything you do is in the interest of me, the paying client and not in the interest of the candidate. It gives me a warped perspective, you know?

Second, this is my experience, what I think works for me, right or wrong. You're right that there are other ways. There are thousands of people who have worked with recruiters, broke all of my so-called rules, and nevertheless they seem very happy with the results. Am I calling them on the phone and telling them they were wrong? Of course not.

Third, you really ought to have your own blog where you run the voodoo down for us. Tell us who you are, how you work, and what you think candidates ought to do. Be specific: tell us why it's in the candidate's best interests to allow you to submit their resume to companies without you disclosing the company to them. Tell us why it's in the candidate's best interests to disclose their compensation details to you.

I look forward to reading what you have to say. I'm not young enough to know everything, and I may pick up a tip that will be useful to me. Speaking as a client, I look forward to hearing how your advice for candidates also happens to be in my best interests as an employer. Whether on contingency or retainer, you almost always work for me, the client. Isn't your obligation to act in the employer's best interests? Or am I wrong about that?

Your blog is sure to be an interesting read. C'mon back when you've got something to say and put a link in the comments here. I look forward to hearing from you.

Yes, I agree, good information. I've recently graduated and been inundated with recruiter calls. And they're snake-oil salesmen for sure. They ALWAYS ask exactly how much you're looking for, and rarely release client information. I worked in a call center for Cingular, and that was a shady job, and I see recruiters in much the same way. They don't care about you, they probably don't care about the client (past sending them at least a couple quality candidates), all they care about is their cut. Don't give out more information than you need, and use them to your advantage (as much as you can, at least).

Never give a recruiter, or for that matter any prospective employer, your salary history. Your current salary is your current employer's proprietary competitive information. You've probably signed a non-disclosure agreement forbidding you to disclose it. Honor that agreement. Then, when they ask "what are your minimum requirements," plus-up 10% :-)

As a professional recruiter I can tell most of this is pretty much exactly not what you want to do. Follow these rules and no recruiter will touch you. Which of course is fine but you will have to find all opportunities on your own. Good luck.

"As a professional recruiter I can tell most of this is pretty much exactly not what you want to do. Follow these rules and no recruiter will touch you."

Bzzt, wrong.

I've been following these rules for years and have never had a recruiter refuse to work with me. Those recruiters I've worked with most closely (including two who have ended up very good friends of mine IRL) have, in fact, given me advice very similar to what's presented in this article. I think - and it has been my experience - that any honest recruiter would give the folks they're representing the same advice.

The part about telling the recruiter how much you get paid only works up to the point at which you sign with them. After that, they know your rate anyways and good luck getting more from them--ever. Also, it is not hard to figure out what most contractors are making these days. Purely guessing, I'd say 98% are in the $40-$60 per hour range, which granted is a wide range. If you want to make more, consider filing an S Corp and becoming your own recruiter.

I don't think many coders use for-hire recruiters. We are usually working with staffing companies who have people who wear the recruiter hat and try to place us where they can get a fee for the service. There is no exclusive relationship other than sound advice not to allow overlap of resume submission.

Salary history is bogus anyway. By law an employer can only confirm you worked there and date of employment. Not salary.

As a recruiter, I found this to be full of inaccurate information. Maybe you haven't worked with the right recruiters?

Some of these comments mention that although they have been following these rules they are still sought after. Most recruiters work solely off commission. Sometimes they have to take you on, especially if the employer is high profile and can pay out.

I'm not on contingency, so I have the ability to be selective. If I encountered a candidate with this mentality I would consider them to be difficult to work with and "not a fit."

In all, do your homework. There are some amazing recruiters out there and for everyone of them there are even more slimy ones.

Reg,I'm a recruiter and I have been a hiring manager and also an HR staffing manager and hired from recruiters, sooo I have an opinion. Having been on both sides of the desk I flatter myself as having a balanced opinion. I agree with most of your advice. It clearly comes from experience. What everyone needs to keep in mind is like every job in the world, doctor, lawyer or plumber, there are good ones and there are poor ones. There are smart ones and there are dumb ones. Keep in mind there is no special education or certification required to hangup a website and call yourself a recruiter.Now for what I do not agree with. Unless you are looking for an executive level position, salary comparison and parity are big issues within all organizations. As an HR person or hiring manager I have a budget and likely another person in a similar position whom I must consider when offering you a job. The best way to work with a recruiter is full disclosure on both sides. If they are not forth coming about job details they likely do not have a trusting relationship with their target client. If they are able to give you full details then you should reciprocate by giving the information that they need. You do not want to work at a company that wants to save money on your salary and if there is a person with equal qualifications to yours, that will work for less, then that is the market force. Not disclosing your current compensation and your desired compensation simply frustrates an already difficult process. And most companies spend tons of money annually on salary surveys so they know within 10K where everyone should be paid. And they will be very PO'd if they trot you down the isle only to find out they cannot possibly match your current comp.My advice, recruiters can be very helpful so help them get their job done. But just like anything else in the world, buyer beware. Talk to the recruiter, understand who they are, where they come from, and how long they have been doing recruiting. You have a right to get all the details of the job before you give any of your information. If they can't or won't give that information to you, then end the call. You shouldn't have a plumber or a roofer do work without checking them out or getting references so take the time to do the same for a recruiter.

I've been on both sides of this fence, and have held arguably the biggest hiring job in the software world. (See my site for details) IMHO, the world of professional recruiters is filled with precious few gems wedged into a pit full of vipers. There are some who genuinely care about matching good people with great jobs. But the vast majority of those I have encountered are in the game because it is stunningly lucrative (see my post here). It's like anything -- wave a lot of money in front of people and they will figure out how to game the system to maximize their income.

This is why I don't recommend that employers use outside recruiters, and I would never use one to find a job for myself. If the company is big enough, I certainly feel that professional internal recruiters are better than asking your HR person to handle it. But unless you have a million safeguards in place, and a contract unlike I've never seen before, outside recruiters bring you people you don't want to see, and who probably don't want to be there.

As a tech recruiter myself, I think the primary issue is that there are so many BAD recruiters out there who don't think of recruiting as a noble profession which ought to be practiced honorably. My job is to make the client happy, of course, but it's also to help someone find a job that will better support his or her family, help him or her attain personal goals, and/or be more personally fulfilling, and the candidate's needs don't always have to be in opposition to the client's needs.

With that manifesto out of the way, I actually wrote a post about salary information a while back on my own blog: http://www.magicpotofjobs.com/2006/07/06/your-recruiter-hates-games-even-more/

Fundamentally, you're right, I don't need to know exactly what a candidate is making. I'm always surprised when people tell me anyway... But what I DO need to know is how much money you WANT. I need to know if you're wildly over/underpriced for the job. I need to know what factors contribute to salary flexibility (shortness of commute? regularity of work hours? what?) Honestly, it only benefits me to get you a good salary, but it screws me over to get you too little, only to have you bolt two months later. (Because then I have to give the fee back.)

Ultimately, you have to find a recruiter you can trust to balance your interests with everyone else.

And I really can't tell you the names of my clients unless I trust you to not circumvent me. Usually, that's sometime after you've signed the agreement in which you promise not to circumvent me. :) But once that trust is established, I'm all about full-disclosure. If I find that you're already working with my client, and I don't have another candidate, I've been known to call the client and tell them to hire you anyway- I'd rather build the goodwill if I'm already not going to get the fee. (I also don't fight over the fee if the other agency submitted the candidate first. I shrug and say, "Well, clearly we all agree you should hire this person." If I'm agreeable to work with, I keep the client long-term.)

So the short version? Find a recruiter with whom you can build a working relationship based on trust (or at least, who doesn't work on commission), and then a lot of these points become moot.

If you're a sogteware engineer, do not work with recruiters. Ever. There is nothing to gain-- they are taking a cut of *YOUR* salary. There money the employer pays them (often %15-%30 of an annual salary) is money they will not be paying you.

So you will always have more negotiating leverage with an employer if you go direct.

Further, now with great job search engines, there is no such thing as "jobs only recruiters know about".

Finally, all the asinine requirements a recruiter will put on your resume results in a personless, pointless, overly long resume that does not get jobs.

I recently went thru a job hunt (after about 15 years of giving recruiters a chance) and found that reworking my resume in My style, and targetted at hiring managers (rather than recruiters) resulted in more interviews, and *much* better offers than I got last time around.

As a candidate, using a recruiter is the lazy route.

As an employer, using a recruiter is the way to get reams of mediocre developers.

Thus, the companies a recruiter can send you on are exactly the kinds of companies you don't want to go work for.

The employment profession has outlived its usefulness by about 20 years. Stop using them, and you'll get better results.

I've been working with various recruiters for the last six months. And every experience I've had thus far with a recruiter has been disappointing. After I submit my resume to them they dont return an email or phone call!!

Even trying to *find* job listings on job boards directly by companies hiring is turning out to be difficult as well.

Another note, especially relevant if you are trying to work for a larger company:

Be careful about which agencies you give ANY information to. Keep in mind that large companies may give 40-50 or more recruiting firms access to their company job posting/listing systems, thus allowing these agencies to view all internal job req's, etc.

Competition is fierce . . .

Let's say you want to work for BigCo-A, and you submit your resume either through their "infamous black hole online resume submission portal" or another agency, etc.

Now, another recruiter contacts you and offers to submit you to for this great opportunity also at BigCo-A. But, you tell them you already submitted your resume and that they shouldn't submit you again. No--you tell them.

Well, I know of some agencies that once you give them this information, they will submit you--without your approval, just to get you disqualified so that their candidates have a better chance of getting the job. Yeah, you lose, they get paid--all because you disclosed too much information to someone you shouldn't have. When some of these shady people are pretending to be your friend and milk you for information, realize it for what it is, they are looking to make money (in reality they are taking away your money and opportunities if they can't make money on you) and sizing up their competition.

Yes, this happens more often than you know--I have friends in the recruiting business (honest ones) and it's sad to hear all these horror stories that the candidates never even know about. Sadly they may even continue to do business with the shady recruiters because they never find out.

With that said, I would recommend to do business with agencies that have long, positive track records and good relationships with companies. On the positive side, I have got interviews just from good recommendations from good recruiters that maintain positive long-term relationships with their clients.

What is this "recruiters are taking YOUR money" business? Often, recruiters have contacts and healthy, active relationships with clients and hiring managers you would never even hear about. Fees are not paid out from the candidates salary. Is Office Depot or Staples making your salary smaller because you use their products? Again, as in all professions, you have exceptional performers, average performers and people that just take up space. Recruiting is a for profit business, however, it doesn't require a slimy, unethical individual to get the job done.

Recruiters (good ones, amyway) will spend endless hours really getting to know a client's environment, management style and team chemistry as well as technical requirements. Then turn around and spend endless hours searching for and screening candidates to make sure there is a good fit on all levels. We don't just match acronyms (don't people write programs that do that?) and send over what turns up. This is how recruiters EARN their fee.

In any case, I think the information posted is useful. I echo prio comments in saying find a recruiter you trust- get references from people who have worked with them, or ask for client references (although this may be difficult, as recruiters typically don't want to disclose their client list, until a genuine interest in working together has been established). Have your own little check off sheet to interview the recruiter to determine if they can help you enhance your career.

This is generally pretty accurate. I'm rarely the first recruiter someone has talked to, so I hear plenty of horror stories about dishonest recruiters -- and to some extent, that's just the way the business is structured. In general, a recruiter gets a cut of the gains if a dishonest tactic pays off, but doesn't have a stake in the consequences if it fails.

My company has set itself up to be less prone to that. We were started by someone who had been in finance before, so to a large extent we're working with companies run by people we know and like -- so we're not going to spam résumés, because we'll be wasting our friends' time (and probably losing our clients, too).

The difference between small, relationship-based firms and large, volume-centered companies is the difference between a matchmaker and a pimp.

I find it funny how many “Anonymous” quotes are posted from recruiters… As a marketing professional I would consider placing your name as a positive opportunity. As a recruiter you are talking to a base of potential customers who are obviously looking for a job… so if you had something worthwhile to say or to offer, they would call. As for my experience with recruiters, I must confess that I place them in the same category as car salesman and real estate agents. It’s not that I think they are inherently dishonest; it’s the similarities in their profession. A car salesman stands to personally gain only if they sell you a car and in the case of a RE agent, they stand to gain if they help you sell or buy a house. In both these cases, and with recruiters, the individuals’ best interests are not represented. Fear and scarcity play a huge role in all their jobs. If an RE agent tries to sell your house for $300K and needs a sale, he or she can persuade you to take the $275K offer by saying… the market is down, there are a lot of houses on the market. The agent only stands to loose a couple hundred bucks, but still gets the sales. Conversely, the RE agents could encourage you to pay $325K for the house... once its gone, it’s gone. Car sales just want the sale… if you pay $16K for the Honda Civic or $25K for the Civic, it makes no matter… your interests are not their concern. Like recruiters, if you take the job for $80K or a $100K they don’t care; it’s only a couple of hundred bucks more… they just want to get the position filled and get to the next placement. It’s not like they offer you a job warranty or future service. A bad placement only gives them another chance to find another candidate. I want to ask a question to the bloggers; if a company does not offer you a position how many other offers does the recruiter present to you? None!

I find it funny how many “Anonymous” quotes are posted from recruiters… As a marketing professional I would consider placing your name as a positive opportunity. As a recruiter you are talking to a base of potential customers who are obviously looking for a job… so if you had something worthwhile to say or to offer, they would call. As for my experience with recruiters, I must confess that I place them in the same category as car salesman and real estate agents. It’s not that I think they are inherently dishonest; it’s the similarities in their profession. A car salesman stands to personally gain only if they sell you a car and in the case of a RE agent, they stand to gain if they help you sell or buy a house. In both these cases, and with recruiters, the individuals’ best interests are not represented. Fear and scarcity play a huge role in all their jobs. If an RE agent tries to sell your house for $300K and needs a sale, he or she can persuade you to take the $275K offer by saying… the market is down, there are a lot of houses on the market. The agent only stands to loose a couple hundred bucks, but still gets the sales. Conversely, the RE agents could encourage you to pay $325K for the house... once its gone, it’s gone. Car sales just want the sale… if you pay $16K for the Honda Civic or $25K for the Civic, it makes no matter… your interests are not their concern. Like recruiters, if you take the job for $80K or a $100K they don’t care; it’s only a couple of hundred bucks more… they just want to get the position filled and get to the next placement. It’s not like they offer you a job warranty or future service. A bad placement only gives them another chance to find another candidate. I want to ask a question to the bloggers; if a company does not offer you a position how many other offers does the recruiter present to you? None!